St Petersburg Workshop
some questions, comments, reflections
by Sybrand Tjallingii
18-10-2010
First of all I have to say that I am impressed by the presentations. They are the result of hard work in a short time in this fascinating city. Now we know that there are three cities: Petersburg, Leningrad and the datsjas and we have developed a deeper understanding of the complex dilemmas of the industrial belt. Moreover, we have now a rich variety of planning and design ideas that make sense and will be very useful for further steps.
A. The group presentations on Monday 18th
As I will not be in Venice the coming weeks I will first write you my comments on the Monday presentations of the groups. I realise that I cannot do justice to all of your ideas. I have to confine myself to those proposals that seem to be most interesting to me. At the end I will give some more general reflections.
1. Re-Creek (Ochta)
A strong point of your presentation is the view on the central role of the river Ochta as a carrier for development. The strategies to connect residential areas to the creek with bike routes and greenways look good.
A first question is about these connectors. I got the impression that the bike routes and the greenways are separated. Or do they coincide? It seems logical to use the synergism between routes, green corridors and the path of the rainwater that can flow to the river. In the cross section it seemed that the rainwater could not flow to the river. Have a look at it and make sure tat the river has a floodplain that can deal with high water if necessary.
Connecting the city to the river Neva is, of course possible with the proposed bridges. But the noise barrier remains and with the new Ochta centre the traffic flows will increase. Would it be an option to more radically reconsider the through fare traffic flows to remove them from the river alltogether?
2. Everyday life (Ochta)
The strength of this group lays in their redesign of the huge courtyards in the Porochovye district, the spaces for everyday life. The role of the rain and the role of car parking are central in your approach. I like the idea of starting in small pilot projects to demonstrate the feasibility in this context, or, to leanr from them and do it better in other parts of this large district.
I have a question about the design of places where water (and cyclists + pedestrians) can cross the roads. It seems good to slow-down the speed of traffic by a bend in the road that can also facilitate people to cross. But why should the watercourse be wider at this point?
Improving the rainwater run-off drainage and keeping it separated from the sewers is good for the water quality and in the space of the courtyards it creates interesting options for combination with playing and walking. Finding alternative solutions for parking is a condition. I seems good to think of a redesign of the foot of the buildings, combining renovation and functional change with new parking garages for a limited number of cars, small enough that people can trust each other and feel safe about their car. In the next steps both the design and the stories can be further developed.
3. Social Capitalism in the pericentre (Ochta)
The video introduction helps in sensing the driving forces of capitalism and the contrasts and social conflicts they create. The strong idea of this group is to use the power of these driving forces in partnerships between strong and weak areas. This seems to be a promising approach, although it will not be easy and it requires not only good design and planning proposals but also skilful governance and financial arrangements.
What is not quite clear to me, is how the road infrastructure and water networks can interact with the proposed concrete pattern of dense and green areas.
In relation to the fast-lane and slow-lane strategies, I proposed in my presentation, the fast-lane strategies are still missing. The idea to remove trucks to the ring road is one step in this context. But the ring road is, I am afraid, too far away.
4. Double Cities (Ochta)
This group puts urban agriculture, the datsja issue on the agenda. It is a very urgent issue in many metropolitan areas that has a very special character in St Petersburg. This generates questions for the far periphery, but also for the periphery very close to urban centres, as here in the Ochta area. I think you made good proposals for the improvement of sanitation and drainage in the datsja area and that is a condition for their role as carriers of landscape diversity.
What is not quite clear yet is how you combine the datsja plan with the love for the river that was so evident in your earlier presentation. How is the routing that connects the residential areas with the datsjas and the river valley. In the design proposals Cyclists do not like 90o angles and it seems better to follow the drainage pattern that flows to the river, taking it as a carrier for drainage and the cycle tracks in one greenway network.
If we want the datsjas to keep playing a role as carriers of landscape in the far and the close periphery, we also have to think about their economic role. How will the products from the datsjas, the fruits and vegetables continue to find their way to the informal markets? And what about the changing nature of datsjas. Middle class people increasingly turn the huts to cottages for their holidays and do no longer grow food crops. From that situation to gated communities, it may be only a few steps.
5. Mind the back (Moskovsky)
The central issue here is the new life for abandoned industrial areas of the old railway complex. The example of the old Warsaw railway can illustrate a possible path to turn these polluted and neglected waste landscape areas (or ‘drossscapes’ as Lars Lerup and Alan Berger call them). It seems a promising idea to use them as new carriers of activities, such as those related to students and tourists. These activities may link the area to both the Hilton hotel on Moskovsky Prospect and to the universities in the old city.
I have questions about the East –West connections that cross the area. Both the proposals for the Obvodny Canal and for the Tramline may be good contribution to the quality of the slow-lane connections. But what to do with the fast lanes? If the busy East-West car traffic will continue to press on the banks of the canal, there will be only limited options for inprovement.
The front side and back side discussion is worth elaborating. If we look at Moskovsky Prospekt as the frontside, we see the chaos of speedy traffic and billboards that is in conflict with the formal buildings and squares designed to impress. If we look at the backside we see the unsafe, neglected abandoned industrial areas in conflict with the informal but safe green spaces for walking and playing designed and used with care. How can we deal with these conflicts?
6. From barrier to carrier (Moskovsky)
This group generated interesting ideas about turning infrastructure barriers to attractors of activities that can bring people together from different sides. Improving the permeability of the barriers and connecting activities to the pores is one strategy. Exploring transformations of railway lines to tramway lines is another.
I have a question about the combination of infrastructure and green structure. Is this a fruitful idea?
In the background of this issue is the search for synergism between activities. Green elements such as trees and lawns may decorate the infrastructure and that’s just fine. Also more technical processes such as water purification through wetlands can be combined well. But as long as the infrastructure carries dynamic traffic flows and attracts activities that depend on loading and unloading, the green structure will not easily carry quiet activities. Avoiding conflicts and seeking synergism between activities leads, in my view, to green structures, parallel to but not coinciding with the dynamic infrastructures.
7. Extravert Micro-rayon (Moskovsky)
As the Everyday life group, also this group starts with the blocks and the courtyards, linking this level of the microrayon to the higher levels. The strength of youl proposals is the combined effort to generate a process of renovation of the buildings and the improved permeability and accessibility by a new network of East – West tramlines. There are also interesting proposals for crossing the highway between these blocks and the western districts.
Questions remain about the step-by-step organisation of the rehabilitation process, including the issues of temporary housing during the reconstruction works. Can new buildings also be used for temporary housing, and what happens thereafter?
The underlying discussion is about the urgent need for a process of urban renewal in the vast residential areas built in the Chrousjtsjov period (and other periods as well). Will it be possible to link the strong driving forces behind new developments to the urgent need for renewal in the old parts?
B. Some reflections and a scenario
Reflecting on the workshop presentations and discussions some ideas emerge about the transformations of the old industrial belt and the role it may be able to play in the development of the greater St Petersburg area. Suppose….
From backside to backbone
Suppose we start with the construction of a new access road, a spine of infrastructure that can carry the redevelopment of the industrial belt between the StPetersburg and Leningrad parts of the city. The new road can best begin at the point where the new ring road highway bends towards the harbour. From that point (where the Baltijski and the old Warsaw rail lines come together) the new road could follow the existing railway lines, meandering to the East up to the river Neva. After a new bridge the access road could then turn North, again following the existing railway. In the North East, the new road can then be connected to the ring road, not far from the upstream Ochta lake.
The main reason for this proposal is to create conditions for the revival of the old industrial belt. I start with the fast lane, because I think that this is the condition for making the old industrial belt attractive for new investments. This corresponds with the proposal of the third group to make capitalism more social by creating partnerships between strong and weak elements in development. My proposal rests on the assumption that the industrial belt, once the strong force of the urban development, can go through a process of economic revival that can make it strong again, strong enough to support weaker social and ecological qualities. The new road may create conditions for this revival. But it is, of course, not a cause and effect relationship. Many more complex processes may play a role. There are several arguments, however, to opt for a scenario that starts with the road.
As in most countries, it can be expected that the economic system will develop from an industrial economy based on heavy manufacturing industry towards a service economy with industry in a role of predominantly assembly plants, using parts produced in different corners of the country and of the world. Essential condition for the new economy is good infrastructure, especially for goods transportation. The politicians that discussed with us last Friday, stressed that the city wants to keep the industry. It may be possible to make a deal between the local government and private parties (the old owners, new investors) linking the investments for the new road and related projects to the expected profits in the future.
From a spatial point of view, an alternative route for goods transportation between Neva and the port creates conditions for traffic calming along the Obvotny Canal. If this takes place it will be possible to create along the canal a ‘slow lane’ zone for pedestrians, bicycles, a tramline and the green and cultural activities that combine with this situation. The same scenario can be realised along the Neva banks South and North of the Ochta mouth. Also here, the banks can be turned to a quiet zone, if an alternative route for cars can be created. The proposed road offers this opportunity. If the new road is constructed on a dyke and combined with the existing railway lines, there will not be a new barrier. The dyke facilitates the construction of viaducts that will create permeability. As the new commercial activities, services and light industry will require less space than the old industry, there will be a lot of space for other things such as sports fields, parks, wetlands etc. A green structure plan for the industrial belt will create both connections in North – South and in East – West directions, connecting the belt with the old and the new city. In the fringes of the industrial belt there will be also place for new residential buildings that can play a role in the big renewal operations that will have to take place in the residential blocks build in the period between 1950 and 1990.
In a flows perspective, polluted soils can be used to build the dyke for the new road, thus concentrating and isolating the pollutants. Heavily polluted soils have to be concentrated and treated. For moderately polluted soils there can be on-site treatment, possibly in combination with water pollution treatment. Wetlands can play an important role in this programme. They are part of the green structure plan and may function in the drainage scheme for the area. Thus, conditions can be created for a surface water drainage plan that aims at collecting all the rainwater from the post war residential areas. This requires a connecting surface water network between these areas and the industrial belt. Parts of the industrial belt can perform a surface water storage function that can play an important role in a water system that prevents rainwater from entering the sewers, thus preventing flood and pollution problems.
It may seem that the proposed road will increase car traffic with all its related problems. This, indeed, is a risk. However, for goods transportation there is no alternative. Trains can never provide the door-to-door or ship-to-factory transport that is essential for the economic revival of the industrial belt. For liquids and gases, however, pipelines might be a good alternative (perhaps, they exist already). New pipelines can be incorporated in the new infrastructure line. Once the revival of the economic belt will generate many jobs, it may be expected that many workers and employees will be inclined to take the car and use the new road to get to their work. If this generates congestion on the new road, however, private car use can be discouraged by road pricing for example. At the same time the use of public transport can be encouraged. In this situation, the rail line is already there and with a complementary network of trams and cycle tracks. For passenger transport, the non-car alternative is conceivable, for goods transportation trains can only be attractive on longer distances and for some goods.
From an energy point of view, part of the industrial and services programme in the industrial belt may be directed to a change of oil-based car transport to natural gas based vehicles. There are still rich resources of natural gas, and Gazprom is a powerful organisation that may be interested in this transformation. Moreover. If a part of the industrial belt will be forested, the wood can be a source of methane gas that is equivalent to fossil natural gas. Thus the industrial belt itself can contribute to CO2 emission reduction and sustainable energy production. In the future, when it has become common practice to generate electric energy with sustainable means, the vehicles will be powered by a system of hydrogen and fuel cells. The natural gas technology and infrastructure will be a good starting point for the hydrogen-based systems of the future.
There are many different possible scenarios. Many ideas, generated by the seven groups can play important roles. The road proposed here did not yet emerge in the discussions but it seems an interesting starting point. I hope the idea will contribute to your critical discussions and design work in the coming weeks.
Sybrand Tjallingii
No comments:
Post a Comment